About your Search

20130416
20130424
STATION
CSPAN 7
CSPAN2 5
CNBC 3
FBC 3
KGO (ABC) 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
MSNBCW 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WRC (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 23
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)
in this race and our thoughts are with all of them today. the department of defense is prepared to respond quickly to any response for additional support from domestic law enforcement agencies. i will continue to consult closely with d.o.d. senior leaders on how we can best support the government's response and investigation. and chairman dempsey may have additional comments regarding this event as well. mr. chairman, i will now turn to my opening statement for this hearing. this year's 2014 budget request for the department of defense is -- as congressman lowey noted, a budget that was put together over many months. an enterprise as large as the department of defense, $600 billion is not collaborated with or on or numbers or budgets instructed in a manner of two or three months. and as we proceed in this hearing this morning, mr. chairman, we will get into some of the specifics of the budget and why some of the decisions were made on the basis of what the numbers will reveal and our responsibilities. allow me to express my appreciation to this subcommittee for its continued support of our
challenges of the defense budget because this program is in some way singular some way singular in terms of its cost overrides, its delays and the way it's been structured to as i write in the peace it's most effective defense of attribute may not be all of its radars and sensors and missiles and stealth technology and ability to fly it synthesized speech. it might well be the way it was designed to avoid budget cutters in washington. >> now a hearing on the justice department's 2014 budget request. attorney general eric holder testified before how supra-patient subcommittee for a little more than two hours. be attorney general holder we welcome you to the committee and thank you for appearing. i'm going to hold my questions until the very end because members have to catch planes and go out of town but i will have an opening statement to cover questions and concerns that i have. let me address the bombing attack at the boston marathon on monday. we know the fbi and the joint terrorist task force batf and its forensic specialists in all the federal state and local authorities are working
array to include a sophisticated air defense capability, depending who is operating in. a no-fly zone would not be without cost. >> even though the best testified he could with cruise missiles and within the patriot missiles in the right place is that we could establish a no-fly zone. >> patriot missiles i'm getting out of my league. that is essentially a point weapon. the theory is you could position patriot missiles outside of syria and somehow provide security outside the zone, given the nature of the pastry about then, which is not an area of a project or would be tough. >> and what's fascinating is now you are saying instead of the joint chiefs of staff that it has deteriorated so much that you now have questions whether we should supply weapto rebels are not, which the argues we shod have supplied them back ommended coing to published reports well heta o state, as well as the chairman of the joint chiefs f staff. it's remarkable. see you in the administration figure and say we don't know where the weapons are going. maybe if we help the people of writing from the beginning befor
for self-defense and for hunting and for sportsman activities. target shooting. i still go target shooting basically out my backyard in searchlight with my grandchildren. but i've always had trouble understanding why people need assault weapons to hunt or protect their homes or to target shoot. when the assault weapons ban came before the senate for a vote ten years ago, i called my friends, one in particular, who is a real advocate with -- on guns. and he said to me, you can't define an assault weapon. why are you doing this? you can't define an assault weapon. he convinced me he was right, so i voted against that. i voted against the ban. just about a month ago i called this same friend. i asked if his opinion had changed. generally no, but specifically yes, it had changed. he still opposes a ban on assault weapons. i said tell me why. i found his new reasoning absurd. and even though i care a great deal about my friend, he's headed in the wrong direction. so it caused me to reassess my position. he said do police have assault weapons? i said, yeah, some of them. he said if they have the
general, the director of national intelligence and the secretary of defense shall jointly establish and periodically review policies and procedures governing the receipt, retention, use and disclosure of nonpublicly available cyberthreat information shared with the federal government in accordance with section 1104b of the national security act of 1947 as added by section 3a of this act. such policies and procedures shall, consistent with the need to protect systems and networks from cyberthreats and mitigate cyberthreats in a timely manner, one, minimize the impact on privacy and civil liberties, two, reasonably limit the receipt, retention, use and disclosure of cyberthreat information associated with specific persons that is not necessary to protect systems or networks from cyberthreats or mitigate cyberthreats in a timely manner. three, include requirements to safeguard nonpublicly available cyberthreat information that may be used to identify specific persons from unauthorized access or acquisition. four, protect the confidentiality of cyberthreat information associated with sp
defense ministers have already begun consideration of the size and mission for a post-2014 force in afghanistan. one factor that will influence that decision is the size and capacity of the afghan security forces. in this regard, the recent decision by nato defense ministers to support maintaining the afghan security forces at the current 352,000 through 2018, rather than reducing the support to a level of 230,000, as previously planned, is the right thing to do. it sends an important signal of our continued commitment to a safe and secure afghanistan and make it feasible for us to have a smaller u.s. and coalition presence after 2014. the greatest challenge to afghanistan's security is not the taliban, but the pakistan- based sanctuaries for militant extremists, launching cross border attacks into afghanistan. pakistan has said it supports a stable and secure afghanistan. but its actions belie its words. the u.s.-pakistan relationship will not be normalized so long as those extremists safe havens exist on pakistani territory. another large challenge to a stable afghanistan is th
trace, hi, jirnlgs as we all know, the department of defense is planning to downsize the military over the next few years as we also conclude our business in afghanistan. do you believe the large amount of dod contractors and military xoert personnel will flood the job market and increase the demand for goods? no, trace, by the way the army and navy don't move that fast. there would be a peace dividend, that happened in the '90. i don't think you should look at this issue in a way to make money off it, though. it's really not a needle-mover. as a matter of fact, it can be negative for a lot of the defense companies, as we know. and they have been under a cloud because of these cuts. here's one from danny in new york. hi, jim, i heard you say considering the downside of an equity that you would consider a stock than a put. please elaborate. danny, i am so glad you sent me this. because if i have created any misperception that i favor shorting stocks, it is completely out of character with all my books and what i used to do with my hedge fund or trading for myself. i always do puts. i ra
, no doubt the fantastic country singer. hi, jim, as we all know, the department of defense is planning to downsize the military over the next few years as we also conclude our business in afghanistan. do you believe the large amount of dod contractors and military expert personnel will flood the job market and increase the demand for goods? no, trace, by the way the army and navy don't move that fast. there could be a peace dividend, where we cut the budget deficit, that happened in the '90s. i don't think you should look at this issue in a way to make money off it, though. it's really not a needle-mover. as a matter of fact, it can be negative for a lot of the defense companies, as we know. and they have been under a cloud because of these cuts. here's one from danny in new york. hi, jim, i have heard you say considering the downside of an equity that you would short a stock rather than buy a put. please elaborate. danny, i am so glad you sent me this. because if i have created any misperception that i favor shorting stocks, it is completely out of character with all my books and what
flow is going into the defensive sector of stocks. while nobody is watching the money is going into the bond market. these are all warning signs saying you know what? maybe we're at temporary top. maybe we need a correction here. david: gene, you see the warning signs. you see the dow pulling back to 14,000, right? >> that is correct. i do think there are signs which the guest already mentioned. there is weakness of oil to be concerned about over the near term. there is correlation with the oil and stock market since the start of this cycle. weakness in oil could portend investors worries that the economies are slowing down not just in china but globally as well. so that will probably put pressure on the market. the other thing too, we're in the earnings season and this might be the quarter that doesn't delight. that is that we do get some dispoints manned -- disappointments and we get stiff reactions to the disappointments. lori: bob, you were cautious yet looking for stocks to show gains for the year. what do you think will get us past these bumps in the road? >> i think the
at a cost of $12 billion. the official position of taiwan's ministry of national defense remains committed to procuring those submarines from the u.s. however, as the u.s. stopped making these diesel submarines many years ago, the sale has been stalled. i know we worked with france and some of our allies on this. could you advise what the current status of this submarines being acquired by taiwan is? and finally, you don't necessarily have to comment on this. if you'd like to you can, but former -- but the former president languishes today in a jail cell in taiwan. to me it smacks of the criminalization of politics. . stoot extent this administration communicates with the president i urge you to urge president mah to do the humanitarian thing, president chen's health is failing. i now yield to you, thank you. >> thank you, congressman. i appreciate it. i'll take that and just follow up on it. let me see what we can do about that. on burma, you are absolutely correct. there will be bumps in the road. i hope not big ones. obviously things are happening today that were unimaginable a few year
, screaming at me, why isn't this guy in jail? look at this way, corzine's defense he put on a trade on italian spanish bonds. we point out that the trade turned out to be very profitable. people got worried about the trade in the market and they pulled out their money from, they pulled out their lines of credit. every brokerage firm needs lines of credit to survive, from mf global. the ensuing madness where mf global, maybe didn't have enough staff on board, caused them, it caused money, customer money to be somehow comingled with the firm money. it is hard to prove, that a, that trade was done with malice. which it wasn't. it turned out to be right ultimately. b, that he really was directing people to misuse customer money. it is, when you break it down, i'm telling you, i'm no fan of jon corzine politically. he is a very nice man personally, this is a hard case to bring. now i'm not saying they are not going to bring it. for all i know they have charges tomorrow. i haven't seen them and i haven't heard of it, but i will tell you he will litigate this back and he could win. this is
in this whole region has been through the department of defense, the military, defense contractors, shipbuilding, hundreds of years of history here building ships. we're the only place in the world that builds nuclear aircraft carriers and submarines and those kinds of vessels. the full range of maritime business. the report. hampton roads is probably the largest physical port. -- on the east coast of the u.s. the challenge is running a city like virginia beach are probably not a lot different than most every city in the country right now. that's all all changing relationships of federalism, the relationship between the state and federal government changing dramaticallymaking it much more difficult to finance the operation of cities to keep up with the needs in terms of part, and just the ongoing eds of the community for cultural, recreational, those kinds of activities. resources are getting harder and harder to find. and the competition for those resources is sharper than ever and it's a real balancing act to try to sort through that and come up with a program that will take us out through the
you were in china that you suggested the united states would reduce our missile defense system in asia for exchange, in exchange for chinese help with north korea. it seems to me that even though we're being threatened by nuclear attack by the north korean government, first of all, is that an accurate statement? and if so, explain that if you would. >> no, not an accurate statement. i think it was corrected while i was over there. it was reporting to that effect. there was no offer, no deal, no contemplation of it. what i did say publicly and i will say it again, is that the president took specific deployment steps of missile defense in direct response to north korea. and it stands to reason that if the north korean threat disappears, there would be a logical question of whether or not th that same level of deployment is necessary. it's all, i stated, was sort of a fact based on the rationale of deployment itself. >> do you think the united states should give aid to north korea of some type to temper their saber rattling, which they seem to do, about this time ever you? >> no. >> thank
disarmament. the reaganites in the defense department were horrified by this and put a stop to it but reagan didn't go all the way with reaganism when he had a chance to end the cold war, especially the nuclear threats. so it's a hard-core republican belief. if you remember the pup pup prime -- republican primaries of 2012, it was not that long ago there were eight or ten republican candidates in simi valley for a debate at the reagan library and every one of them said reagan set the example how maring be strong, reagan did with the soviet union and we should do it today in iran, we should do it -- we were right toy trite in iraq. america should use its power to achieve its spend destroy its enemies. i worked in the cold war and in the middle east. you have 29% of the american people agree with that today. >> richard, do you want to say something? you're leaning forward. >> no. >> okay. we want to take questions from the audience if anybody has a question, and i think there's a microphone somewhere that someone is going to bring up. why don't we start right up here on the aisle, blue shirt.
cold war world. he set up -- he set up a defense structure that cold war started with harry truman and ended with ronald reagan. and now he's considered one of the near great presidents. >> i've always found it fascinating how in realtime we build up and tear down presidents. historians do the same thing. there was a time period 20 or 30 years when historians were giving truman not much credit and there was some revisionism in the late '90s. and we've seen it with grant, with polk, we'll see it with other presidents. >> right. and you look at george bush and 30, 40 years from now, obviously our pearl harbor is 9/11. and a lot of people, historians going to say america wasn't attacked again during the rest of his term over the next seven years. and painted in broad colors, broad strokes, he's going to be judged first and foremost for that. >> what's going on in the aftermath of boston. barack obama has to start worrying about his legacy and isn't going to be enough. does he want his legacy to be i failed? are there going to be any excuses big enough for history. he's got to figure o
to stop playing some defense with high-needing food stocks that can thrive, even when the global economy is in dire straits. take long-time cramer fave b & g foods, neglected brands from larger players, private equity firms, and bringing them back to it life. you might know b & g as pickles. b & g just reported last thursday and the company delivered an excellent quarter with in-line earnings and revenues that came in higher than expected, rising 8.8% year over year. we don't have a lot of companies in the food business that gained like that. meanwhile, the company raises for guidance, earnings before interest, taxes and depreciation and amortization. it jumped from $28 to $30 the next day and continuing to climb, $31.08 and 3.75% yield at these levels. b & g has given a 186% return since i initially recommended in october of 2010. the valuation may seem stretched with the stock trading at 19 times earnings. however, every time the stocks seem too expensive to own, they seem to go higher anyway. let's check in with the president of b & g foods and find out more about the quarter and wher
/2 months of testimony. defense attorneys for jodi arias have rested their case. the trial is far from over. later today the prosecutor is set to call rebuttal witnesses. jodi arias admits to killing her ex-boyfriend. she insist it was self defense. if convicted of murder she faces the death penalty. the trial is expected to last several more weeks. >>> the judge in the jackson family lawsuit against concert promoter aeg is fed up. the jackson family is seeking millions from the promoter in the civil lawsuit. the judge says from now on she will not consider any more requests from potential jurors to leave the case except for medical emergencies. the judge has been swamped with last minute excuses from would-be jurors and she says she is concerned that the jury pool is dwindling fast. one man claimed he simply dislikes michael jackson and his entire family. >> think a lot of people may want to be on the jury. >> i don't understand. >>> powerful voice in gospel music silenced, george beverly shea, performed hundreds of millions as part of billy graham's evangelical crusades, performed in fron
probably own stock in corporations, as wealthy as you are, that have an interest in the defense industry, and you as a shareholder could get hands on that. >> really, i could? >> not all is classified. certainly, the fact they are doing is not classified. >> isn't that hate speech? >> no, even hate speech is protected. hate speech is protected as long as -- >> it's mayhem that's not protected. >> i could have sworn the anarchist cook book was banned. was that just lore? >> i think it was lore that was banned. the theory of the federal government is that individuals should decide what to read and see and hear and distribute. the government doesn't make those decisions for them. >> hate speech sows violence is outlawed >> right? >> all speech is incompetitive advantage wows when there's speech to rebut it. if there's stuart, let's get him, the mob gets him, i could be funnish -- punished for speech, but they say, what, are you crazy? it's stuart, and mob lays back, my speech is protected. >> i want to recommend your editorial in today's "washington times" about social security being a ponz
to be said about what this bill does, but our point is that we believe in law enforcement as the best defense is a strong offense. there are so many provisions in this bill that would encourage or discourage illegal immigration, it would create the first choice in those who want to come to this country to work, to benefit their own lives and benefit this great country. that is to choose a pathway that is correct and legal. all those other provisions in this law are those that help with regard to a stronger border. >> thank you very much. the fmemayoof denver, colorado, currently serves as president and ceo of the hispanic chamber of commerce of metro denver. good to have you here, mr. mayor. >> thank you, mr. chairman, members of the committee. to there to lend support border security economic maturity. -- economic we send our present supports to our neighbors in texas and massachusetts and in solidarity with and with american that you try to make a better bet for your kitty. and the president and ceo of the hispanic chamber of commerce metro denver, an organization of over 2000 business memb
finance committee. the senate armed services committee will do an overview of defense authorization. chuck hagel will be at that as well as general martin dempsey, at that hearing. the house oversight and government reform committee is having a hearing on postal service insolvency. to find out when and where all of that will be airing, go to our website, c-span.org, for more details. chuck in massachusetts, a democrat. thought.ust a when you consider how 9/11 and brought the american public together, the last thing al qaeda would want to do would be to recreate that feeling of united ness. they like us divided. was shown as ait relatively easy, but they did in boston yesterday. like hawk-eye wanted to do something like that, they could do it relatively easily. i don't think they want to do it, because it would backfire on them. that's my thought. host: all right. that's the point of the show, to get everybody stopped and a variety of opinions this morning. one more story to give you before we go on to talk to two members of congress. poisonlope containing mailed to the senate this office,
defense systems to guard against any miscalculation on their part. >> on the budget, is this your last best final offer to republicans? >> what i tried to do is put forward a budget that i think is a realistic compromise. >> would you go farther on entitlement cuts? >> it does not give republicans everything they want, frankly it doesn't reflect everything i would like to see. it puts forward some of the ideas the republicans had suggested around entitlement reform that i think are reasonable policy. >> they say it's not enough and it's not enough to make a deal, would you go farther? >> i think that before we go anywhere, right now we've got to see from republicans what exactly is it that they want to do. i mean, when they say they want to go farther, what do they want to do? what are they putting on the table. >> you've got democrats a little mad at you, too, saying you've cut social security and medicare and now this is going to come back and haunt them in their races. >> part of what we have to think about, whether we're democrats or republicans is how do we create a system where o
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)